Thread Tools

Belichick has taken a lot of heat here from a number of posters for making a trade that on the surface does not help us in 2009. Mazz also is on the if-it-doesn't-help-now-it-is-a-bad-trade bandwagon, using BB's words from the statement explaining the trade as proof BB has made a bad decision:

Belichick continued. â€œAs an organization, we feel the trade with Oakland brings sufficient value and is in the long-term interest of the club.

BB seems to be a lone voice, as Tom Cable is also strongly in the it-must-be-now crowd, saying about the Seymour trade:

"The issue is, you want to make your team better for right now," Cable said. "Right now is all that matters.

Belichick has taken a lot of heat here from a number of posters for making a trade that on the surface does not help us in 2009. Mazz also is on the if-it-doesn't-help-now-it-is-a-bad-trade bandwagon, using BB's words from the statement explaining the trade as proof BB has made a bad decision:

Belichick continued. â€œAs an organization, we feel the trade with Oakland brings sufficient value and is in the long-term interest of the club.

BB seems to be a lone voice, as Tom Cable is also strongly in the it-must-be-now crowd, saying about the Seymour trade:

"The issue is, you want to make your team better for right now," Cable said. "Right now is all that matters.

Whose camp are you in?

Click to expand...

You want to win now and later, so you try to balance the two. You build you system and stick to it, while at the same time evaluating the system within the changing NFL and making necessary tweaks.

BB, I actually like the move. The move allows us flexibility and security for the future and we still have the pieces to win now so I think the move is great for us. I don't think losing seymour will significantly effect NE this year. From the Raiders standpoint its a risky move, There is no guarantee that Seymour will help the Raiders significantly. If the Raiders go 4-12 this year and Seymour leaves it could turn out to be the most lopsided trade in history depending on what the Pats do with the 2011 pick.

The odds that Tom Cable will be coaching Oakland in 2011 have got to be less than 10%, given the topsy-turvy recent history of the Raiders. So of course anything he does has to be for right now - he has no future. BB has 3 SBs under his belt, and is in the process of rebuilding from the ground up one of the greatest teams of all time, without a dropoff in performance, a feat which has never been accomplished - all of the great teams, from the 70's Steelers, the 80's 49ers, the 90's Cowboys, etc. pretty much faded when their key personnel got old, and went through terrible periods before bouncing back. So BB can afford to take a longer term view.

Belichick has taken a lot of heat here from a number of posters for making a trade that on the surface does not help us in 2009. Mazz also is on the if-it-doesn't-help-now-it-is-a-bad-trade bandwagon, using BB's words from the statement explaining the trade as proof BB has made a bad decision:

Belichick continued. â€œAs an organization, we feel the trade with Oakland brings sufficient value and is in the long-term interest of the club.

BB seems to be a lone voice, as Tom Cable is also strongly in the it-must-be-now crowd, saying about the Seymour trade:

"The issue is, you want to make your team better for right now," Cable said. "Right now is all that matters.

Whose camp are you in?

Click to expand...

I don't think we're talking either/or here. Belichick is obviously a smarter coach, by a factor of at least 100, but Cable isn't wrong, given his situation. WTF does he care about a 2011 pick, when recent history suggests that odds are as good as not that he won't even make it past the midpoint of this season?

I find it ironic that the team that is obviously more than one year away from being competitive is looking short-term and needing to 'win now', while the team that some are predicting to go to the Super Bowl is making moves looking two or three years down the road.

Then again, perhaps it is not ironic at all; the difference in philosophies could help to explain why one team has eight straight winning seasons, while the other has six straight seasons with double-digit losses.

I think it's a good move by the Pats to get a 1st round pick because Seymour would've walked in 2010. However, I think Seymour will force the Raiders or Pats to rescind this deal and trade him elsewhere. Until Seymour actually reports, this deal is far from over. If Seymour is smart and doesn't want to play for the Raiders, he can jack this transaction up by not reporting. In fact, not even a "5 day letter" should scare him because if he doesn't report, everybody loses.

I thought this was a sarcastic thread until I clicked on it, wow! Even if they were both first year coaches with no history, one chose to work for Robert Kraft and one for Al Davis....that should answer the question.

Belichick has taken a lot of heat here from a number of posters for making a trade that on the surface does not help us in 2009................../QUOTE]

And you can stop right there; on the surface does not help us in 2009? No, it does not help us AT ALL in 2009, we are a weaker team in 2009 as a result of the trade.

Not sure what the philosophy of this team is anymore to be honest. If you had a choice between not trading Seymour, winnng the Super Bowl but having him walk next year with zero compensation OR trading him, getting a #1 pick and losing the Super Bowl, which would you choose.

Pretty easy choice IMO, although there are some around here who would pick the latter and say "Hey, it was a fun ride even though we lost the Super Bowl and now we are set up for a run towards the 2011 Super Bowl..........."

Belichick has taken a lot of heat here from a number of posters for making a trade that on the surface does not help us in 2009................../QUOTE]

And you can stop right there; on the surface does not help us in 2009? No, it does not help us AT ALL in 2009, we are a weaker team in 2009 as a result of the trade.

Not sure what the philosophy of this team is anymore to be honest. If you had a choice between not trading Seymour, winnng the Super Bowl but having him walk next year with zero compensation OR trading him, getting a #1 pick and losing the Super Bowl, which would you choose.

Pretty easy choice IMO, although there are some around here who would pick the latter and say "Hey, it was a fun ride even though we lost the Super Bowl and now we are set up for a run towards the 2011 Super Bowl..........."

The Raiders gave up the most yards during the preseason ... which is no big deal if you're just evaluating players. Evidently ... they were really trying and gave up a ton of yards anyways ... now they're screwed so the panic for Seymour

Some fun facts regarding this move. Seymour would be joining Gerard Warren who went 3 spots ahead of him in the 2003 draft. The Raiders released William Joseph who was on some people's boards here in 2003 when we selected Ty Warren. William Joseph was selected #25 by the NY fooseball Giants ... In both drafts some here got the position drafted right but the player wrong.